• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Need a recommendation for a "future proof" non gaming CPU (Part II)

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,562
96
So basically double the price is a "small difference"? I would recommend the 2400G or probably the 2600(X). The 2600 is a good bit cheaper but still plenty capable with 6C/12T. Since AM4 still has a future, one could always upgrade to a future 8 core Zen 2 or maybe even Zen 3.
Well I'm sure a replacement will be out by 2022 or whenever DDR5 becomes widely available for consumer level systems.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,485
33
86
My vote is for the 2400G. For non-gaming and light/low-res gaming, it's a very nice processor, with plenty of performance headroom, if you're not doing prosumer level 4K video editing, or other serious content creation. Having the video configuration options available to you just as if you had an add-on Radeon card could also come in handy, at some point, and may be especially good to have if you need to tweak some settings for an old game. Even as a gamer and general power user, I'm still not itching to upgrade from my E3-1230V3, that is pretty much equal to the R5 2400G.

For general use, I don't see a need for 6C/12T or 8C/16T, at least not for the next few years, and the GPU on it should handle the HDMI DRM schemes that you'll need.
 

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,605
1,540
106
My vote is for the 2400G. For non-gaming and light/low-res gaming, it's a very nice processor, with plenty of performance headroom, if you're not doing prosumer level 4K video editing, or other serious content creation. Having the video configuration options available to you just as if you had an add-on Radeon card could also come in handy, at some point, and may be especially good to have if you need to tweak some settings for an old game. Even as a gamer and general power user, I'm still not itching to upgrade from my E3-1230V3, that is pretty much equal to the R5 2400G.

For general use, I don't see a need for 6C/12T or 8C/16T, at least not for the next few years, and the GPU on it should handle the HDMI DRM schemes that you'll need.
That really doesn't seem like a significant enough upgrade over his 6 year old computer where he wants some long term usage ("future proof").

I really think a 6 core like the Ryzen 2600 (or maybe a 1600 if there is a good deal) is a nice upgrade with LONG term usage ahead.

IIRC he currently has a Radeon HD 6850, which may be better than 2400G in some areas.

Ryzen 6 core + GTX 1050(with or without TI) seems like a reasonable cost option that improves significantly over what he has now and is a lot more future proof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whm1974

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,562
96
That really doesn't seem like a significant enough upgrade over his 6 year old computer where he wants some long term usage ("future proof").

I really think a 6 core like the Ryzen 2600 (or maybe a 1600 if there is a good deal) is a nice upgrade with LONG term usage ahead.

IIRC he currently has a Radeon HD 6850, which may be better than 2400G in some areas.

Ryzen 6 core + GTX 1050(with or without TI) seems like a reasonable cost option that improves significantly over what he has now and is a lot more future proof.
something like this?
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/jqztWD
 

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,605
1,540
106
Sure, but it's the OP that has to decide exactly what he wants. I just noticed the nifty feature of PCpartPicker that lets you switch Countries and automatically grabs the prices in that Country (OP and I are both in Canada).

I am kind of in a similar situation, I am looking to replace my 10 year old C2Q/8800GT system, so I am also looking for long term use out of my next system, but I can wait for fall to see new NVidia GPUs (or get deals on old ones). And maybe see Intel new line of CPUs not for the 8 core, but maybe they will lower the price more on 6 core, and we can always dream RAM prices drop...
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,562
96
Sure, but it's the OP that has to decide exactly what he wants. I just noticed the nifty feature of PCpartPicker that lets you switch Countries and automatically grabs the prices in that Country (OP and I are both in Canada).

I am kind of in a similar situation, I am looking to replace my 10 year old C2Q/8800GT system, so I am also looking for long term use out of my next system, but I can wait for fall to see new NVidia GPUs (or get deals on old ones). And maybe see Intel new line of CPUs not for the 8 core, but maybe they will lower the price more on 6 core, and we can always dream RAM prices drop...
Well I'm glad picked a quad-core mid-range CPU and got 16GB of memory back in 2013. I may have gone overboard with the 30" Dell 2014 and 2 1TB M500 SSDs at the time, but I can use this system until 2023 if I had to.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,485
33
86
Sure, but it's the OP that has to decide exactly what he wants. I just noticed the nifty feature of PCpartPicker that lets you switch Countries and automatically grabs the prices in that Country (OP and I are both in Canada).

I am kind of in a similar situation, I am looking to replace my 10 year old C2Q/8800GT system, so I am also looking for long term use out of my next system, but I can wait for fall to see new NVidia GPUs (or get deals on old ones). And maybe see Intel new line of CPUs not for the 8 core, but maybe they will lower the price more on 6 core, and we can always dream RAM prices drop...
In the sense that more cores will be faster for what uses them, sure. But, outside of heavy gaming and content creation, 2C4T is fine, these days, and 4C8T still way overkill. I use from 2C4T to 6C12T on a fairly regular basis, and with lightweight usage, I could probably pick up which one has the newest SSD, but any CPU differences will take loading the 2C4T down a good bit, and 4C8T remains smooth as butter even then.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
50,438
6,031
126
But, outside of heavy gaming and content creation, 2C4T is fine, these days, and 4C8T still way overkill. I use from 2C4T to 6C12T on a fairly regular basis, and with lightweight usage, I could probably pick up which one has the newest SSD, but any CPU differences will take loading the 2C4T down a good bit, and 4C8T remains smooth as butter even then.
I don't know about that. My DeskMini units have 2C/4T Kaby Lake CPUs in them, as does this one desktop I recently pulled out of storage to tweak, and my main desktop hooked up to the same screen, is a R5 1600, with 16GB of DDR4-2400 @ 2133 (because the ASRock BIOS doesn't support this DRAM at 2400. :( ), and I daresay, even mining on the Ryzen desktop, and with the CPU graph COMPLETELY FILLED, it still feels a tad more responsive web browsing, than that Kaby Lake CPU, even unloaded.

However, this may be partially due to power-saving states and perceptive latency, it's subtle, but the CPU still takes time to "ramp up" to full speed to process every new web page, and that can be perceivable by some people. Whereas, under load, my Ryzen CPU stays pinned at all-core turbo speeds. Plus, Ryzen has 16MB of L3 cache, and the Kaby Lake has 3MB. Quite a difference.

I could perceive the difference in multi-tasking smoothness, even back in the Pentium II / CeleronA days, which is why I chose to overclock a PII-300 to 450, rather than a CeleronA, because it had 512KB, rather than 128KB, of L2 cache.

Basically, "jus sayin", that, these days, 4C/4T minimum for desktop tasks. 2C/4T for minimal tasks, if you're on a severe budget ($$$ or TDP). 2C/2T is pretty useless these days, the extra two threads help for smoothness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whm1974

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,485
33
86
I don't know about that. My DeskMini units have 2C/4T Kaby Lake CPUs in them, as does this one desktop I recently pulled out of storage to tweak, and my main desktop hooked up to the same screen, is a R5 1600, with 16GB of DDR4-2400 @ 2133 (because the ASRock BIOS doesn't support this DRAM at 2400. :( ), and I daresay, even mining on the Ryzen desktop, and with the CPU graph COMPLETELY FILLED, it still feels a tad more responsive web browsing, than that Kaby Lake CPU, even unloaded.
You mean using the CPU to mine some coins in the background? In that case, the CPU is filled up, and the system with the most cores and/or cache should feel the fastest, especially on Windows. That's not really giving it light loading that typical web, office, and consumption tasks do.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
50,438
6,031
126
You mean using the CPU to mine some coins in the background? In that case, the CPU is filled up, and the system with the most cores and/or cache should feel the fastest, especially on Windows. That's not really giving it light loading that typical web, office, and consumption tasks do.
Buit I'm saying, the R5 1600 (completely loaded down on CPU, according to Task Manager graphs), is MORE responsive, than the Kaby Lake 2C/4T CPU, (unloaded, completely idle).

Which is probably due to the power-saving features of the Intel CPUs.

Last time this came up, and I started a thread about it, someone pointed out disabling the power-saving features of the Intel CPUs, brought their responsiveness back up, and it does.

But I don't like to do that on the DeskMini units, as they are small, limited cooling, etc.
 

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,605
1,540
106
In the sense that more cores will be faster for what uses them, sure. But, outside of heavy gaming and content creation, 2C4T is fine, these days, and 4C8T still way overkill. I use from 2C4T to 6C12T on a fairly regular basis, and with lightweight usage, I could probably pick up which one has the newest SSD, but any CPU differences will take loading the 2C4T down a good bit, and 4C8T remains smooth as butter even then.
But it isn't just for "these days". It also for the future.

OP has a history of keeping previous computer for long time (IIRC, 6 years on the one he is replacing) and he specifically says he is looking for "future proof".

So I think 6 cores is reasonable for someone who still might be using the computer in 6+ years. Plus it is nice to get a significant boost in performance when you upgrade to a new computer. That and a Ryzen 2600 is in nice sweet spot where it isn't too expensive to get those 6 cores. Plus, I think we kind of have consensus on Ryzen six core.
 
  • Like
Reactions: logicalxm

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
50,438
6,031
126
If I was buying a NEW custom PC / parts, with an eye for the future, I would get a six-core MINIMUM, full-stop. OP, get a 2600(X), some fast DDR4 (3000, 3200), and a GTX 1050ti 4GB or 1060 6GB (or an RX 580 8GB).

This R5 1600 CPU that I've got, has proven to be a real powerhouse, for everything that I've thrown at it. It's not half bad, mining, too.

I did buy a 2700X, but that's in Mark's capable hands right now. :)
 

logicalxm

Member
Jul 21, 2009
74
5
71
Pulled the trigger on the Ryzen 5 2600 for $160 US from Amazon.com :)

Only extra $20 fees when shipping to Canada. Cheaper than buying it from a Canadian retailer, including Amazon.ca.

Thank you guys for the informed replies that showed me that the best "future proof" consensus would be to purchase the the Ryzen 2600.
Now, since I am not in a rush, I am planning to wait for the B450 mobos to become available. In the meantime, will purchase other hardware (PSU, RAM, Case)...
 

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,605
1,540
106
Pulled the trigger on the Ryzen 5 2600 for $160 US from Amazon.com :)

Only extra $20 fees when shipping to Canada. Cheaper than buying it from a Canadian retailer, including Amazon.ca.
I was shocked initially, but it looks like it's just a sale in the USA that didn't cross the border. 2600x is about the same price in both countries.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY